Sandor Jozsef Molnar v Registrar for Approved Driving Instructors

Introduction

1. This is an appeal against a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’), made on 24th February 2025, to refuse to grant the Appellant a third trainee licence.

2. The matter was determined on the papers, by agreement with the parties. Legal Framework

3. The grant of a trainee licence enables applicants to provide instruction for payment before they are qualified.

4. A trainee licence may be granted in the circumstances set out in s. 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (‘the Act’) and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005.

5. A licence under section 129(1) of the Act is granted: ‘for the purpose of enabling a person to acquire practical experience in giving instruction in driving motor cars with a view to undergoing such part of the examination… as consists of a practical test of ability and fitness to instruct.’

6. In order to qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor, applicants must pass the Qualifying Examination. This comprises: the written examination (‘Part 1’); the driving ability and fitness test (‘Part 2’); and the instructional ability and fitness test (‘Part 3’).

7. Three attempts are permitted at each part. The final Part 3 test, must be booked within 2 years of passing Part

1. If it is not passed, the whole Qualifying Examination has to be retaken.

8. If a candidate has passed Part 2, they may be granted a trainee licence. The grant of a trainee licence enables applicants to provide instruction for payment before they are qualified. It is possible to qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor without having held a trainee licence.

9. The powers of the Tribunal in determining this appeal are set out in s.131 of the Act. The Tribunal may make such order as it thinks fit.

10. When making its Decision, the Tribunal stands in the shoes of the Registrar and takes a fresh decision on the evidence available to it, giving appropriate weight to the Registrar’s decision as the person tasked by Parliament with making such decisions.

11. The burden of proof in satisfying the Tribunal that the Registrar’s decision was wrong rests with the Appellant. Factual Background to the Appeal

12. The Appellant had not previously been on the Register of Approved Driving Instructors.

13. The Appellant passed Part 1 of the Qualifying Examination on 19th October 2023 and Part 2 on 27th November 2023.

14. The Appellant was in receipt of a trainee licence which was valid from 4th March 2024 to 3rd September 2024 and which was later extended by the Respondent until 3rd March 2025.

15. The Appellant has had a number of opportunities to take the Part 3 test. He failed it on 15th August 2024 and again on 8th May 2025. It has been booked on a further five occasions, of which four were cancelled by the Appellant and one was marked by DVSA as “unknown”.

16. The last booked test, on 1st September 2025, was marked as cancelled by the Appellant.

17. On 2 February 2025 the Appellant applied for a third trainee licence. This application was therefore made before the expiry of the second trainee license. His license is extended to the date of this decision by virtue of that application and this appeal.

18. On 5th February 2025 the Appellant was informed, by the Respondent, that he was considering refusing the application and invited to make representations.

19. The Appellant made representations to the Respondent on 10th February 2025. He stated that getting a test in the local area, where he knew the roads, was difficult and that without a trainee license he was not able to work for his employer. Without that employment he was not able to have a training vehicle or access to learners. This would make his ability to attend part 3 “virtually zero”.

20. The application was refused on 24th February 2025.

21. The reasons for the Respondent’s decision, in summary, were that no evidence of lost practice time was provided and the Appellant had already had a trainee license for twelve months, sufficient time to obtain the experience to pass the Part 3 test. Appeal to the Tribunal

22. The Appellant filed an appeal against the decision of the Respondent on 3rd March 2025.

23. The grounds of appeal were, in summary, that: a. the only way to work as a driving instructor with a provisional license, is to work for a driving school; b. in this way he has access to a training vehicle and pupils: access to those are essential for his preparation; c. he had struggled to get a Part 3 test in the area with which he was familiar.

24. The Respondent, in his response, states: a. the purpose of the provisions governing the issue of licences is to afford applicants the opportunity of giving instruction to members of the public whilst endeavouring to achieve registration. The system of issuing licences is not and must not be allowed to become an alternative to the system of registration; b. the licence granted to applicants is not to enable the instructor to teach for however long it takes to pass the examinations, but to allow up to six months experience of instruction. This provides a very reasonable period in which to reach the qualifying standard in the examination and in particular, to obtain any necessary practical experience in tuition. The Appellant has already had two trainee licences which cover a period of 12 months. Moreover, by virtue of the Appellant having applied for a third licence before the expiry date of the second, that licence has remained in force to the present time and will allow him to continue to give paid instruction until determination of the appeal; c. since passing his driving ability test the Appellant has failed the instructional ability test twice and cancelled four more such tests booked for 27 June 2024, 03 March 2025, 03 July 2025 and 22 July 2025. Despite ample time and opportunity the Appellant has not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor; d. the refusal of a third licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting the instructional ability test of the Register examinations. He does not need to hold a licence for that purpose, nor is it essential for him to give professional tuition under licence in order to obtain further training. The Appellant could attend a training course, or study and practice with an Approved Driving Instructor or give tuition on his own (provided that he does not receive payment of any kind for this). These alternatives are used by some trainees who acquire registration without obtaining any licences at all. Evidence

25. I read and took account of a bundle of documents. Discussion and Conclusions

26. I may overturn the decision of the Respondent if I am of the opinion that it was wrong. The burden is on the Appellant to show this.

27. I note that the Appellant has already had the benefit of trainee licences from 4th March 2024 until today’s date. This has given him almost 18 months, which should have been adequate time to prepare.

28. I have seen no evidence from the Appellant as to why at least four, and possibly five test opportunities, had been cancelled. There is no evidence of a further test having been booked or placed on hold further to the cancelled test on 1st September 2025.

29. The Appellant sought to have his license extended to May 2025. He has more than exceeded that goal by virtue of filing this appeal.

30. Having weighed all matters in the balance, the Appellant has not persuaded me that the Respondent’s decision was wrong in any way. In all the circumstances, I agree with theRespondent’s decision and the appeal is dismissed. Signed: Judge Sanger Date: 11th August 2025